TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Robert I. Eachus" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Robert I. Eachus
Date:
Fri, 17 Sep 1999 14:36:14 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (13 lines)
At 04:17 PM 9/16/1999 -0600, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>I couldn't agree more. ACT is great, but the problem is that their support
>costs much more than that "included" with the RTOS toolsets. That is what
>the holders of the purse strings see, not the savings due to better tools.

   I'm very confused by this paragraph.  For projects seriously using Ada, I strongly recommend that they pay for ACT support.  It is well worth the money.  You can get similar support from Rational, in my experience it costs more but provides more "hands on" involvement.  However, the support available for GNAT for free is, in my experience much better than you get from most vendors when you pay for a support contract.  I suspect that you are comparing apples to gourmet dinners.  Try listing what you get for support from the other vendors you are talking about with what you get for free for GNAT and other gnu products.

                                        Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...

ATOM RSS1 RSS2